Redundancy comment was crass

FOR decades the States was broadly an employers’ forum. Populated by retired and semi-retired businessmen it took a lop-sided view of issues such as employee rights. Businesses thrived but at times government looked uncaring and elitist.

FOR decades the States was broadly an employers’ forum. Populated by retired and semi-retired businessmen it took a lop-sided view of issues such as employee rights. Businesses thrived but at times government looked uncaring and elitist.

One of the reasons put forward for paying States deputies was that it would rid the island’s government of the ‘employers’ tag by encouraging men and women from all walks of life to stand for election.

The initiative proved so successful that at the last election there was a concerted push for more business people to come forward to redress the balance.

One of those who did so was former radio chief executive Kevin Stewart, who was promptly elected Commerce and Employment minister.

Tomorrow, Deputy Stewart will sit down with his board to discuss statutory redundancy payments, an area where Guernsey is out of step with both the UK and Jersey.

The debate will inevitably be coloured by the minister’s harsh words last week when he doubted whether it was worth the States investing £300,000 to bring in a law to help people made jobless ‘if it only happens occasionally’.

It was a crass and thoughtless statement in such difficult times and one which he should already be regretting.

It was offensive for those workers caught up in the closure of Huelin-Renouf and Warrys but also for the scores of people laid off every year through no fault of their own.

Unsure of their job prospects and many with families to support it will be no comfort that the minister questions the value of spending almost £200,000 less than his department spends each year on trade and media relations.

With several board members open to the idea of statutory redundancy payments, tomorrow’s discussion will hopefully be more measured and more considerate of how it must feel suddenly to have no job and no hope of compensation while colleagues from Jersey and the UK are being helped out.

Dismissing such inequalities without due consideration will reinforce the view that the States is still an employers’ forum.

MUCH of the interest in this week’s States debate on parochial church property stems not from the proposed law – which was studiously unambitious – but from the amendments it faces.
To have as many as four amendments to a projet at this stage is unusual and an indication that the long period of consultation, consideration and legal drafting has failed to satisfy some members that it has all been worth it.
The latest amendment is a fundamental shift not just to this law but could be said have far-reaching implications for one of the central principles of taxation.

WHILE done with the best of intentions, there is something uncomfortable about a large group of deputies writing to the Environment Department asking for it to grant permission for Green Acres Hotel to convert to a dementia care home.
The deputies, led by Matt Fallaize, argue that it is ‘entirely appropriate’ for representatives of the people to speak out collectively and unequivocally on a subject about which they feel strongly.
And yet. Should politicians seek to interfere with a quasi-judicial process which they have delegated to one department?

IF YOU believe the adage that ‘people living in greenhouses shouldn’t throw stones’, you might have been surprised at the reaction the Commerce and Employment Department received last week when it attempted to move forward with its ‘Digital Greenhouse’ plans.
Certainly the department’s board members and staff seemed shocked at the critical, bordering on hostile, reaction its plans received from the very people it thought would be enthusiastic users of the space it is so keen to open.
It would have been clear to see through the panes that all was not well.

THERE are many similarities between the draft Island Development Plan and the Personal Tax, Benefits and Pensions review.
Both are of huge importance and seek to set the agenda for years to come, both are a series of interlocking measures and both are of huge complexity.
But it is in how they are received that they share the greatest bond. Both encourage islanders to look at the big picture knowing that most people will choose first to examine how it directly affects them.